Not a week goes by, it seems, without a scandal to shake the University of California at its core. First there was “Greenwood Gate,” which brought disrepute to the business dealings of the university’s vice president, and eventually her (paid) resignation. Then there was the secret compensation debacle. And more problems continue to emerge.

Yet the blame does not lie with UC President Robert C. Dynes alone; the problem is the very structure of the university.

Since its creation, the UC Board of Regents has lacked the tools it needs to effectively oversee the burgeoning system. For almost all of their information, the regents must rely on data collected and spoon-fed by the UC Office of the President. Instead of acting as a board of directors, one that could look out for the interests of the state, the Board of Regents is reduced to the role of a rubber stamp.

What the university urgently needs are institutional reforms similar to those carried out in the state Legislature six decades ago, which transformed an amateur legislative body at the mercy of the governor into a force to be reckoned with.

First and foremost, the regents must wean themselves off their UCOP dependency, perhaps through increased delegation to the faculty Academic Senate. And second, the position of the regent can no longer be political booty: Regents must be appointed for their administrative prowess, not political connections, and should receive pay that allows them to devote their primary efforts to the university.

This week, the Legislature took a long hard look at the university, and its tribulations. Now, instead of dishing out blame, lawmakers must offer structural and constitutional reforms that will bring the university into the 21st century.